Human Herpesvirus-6 Detection in Cerebrospinal Fluid on the BioFire FilmArray Meningitis/Encephalitis Panel in a High HIV-prevalence African Setting

The prevalence and clinical relevance of human herpesvirus-6 (HHV-6) detection in cerebrospinal fluid (CSF) using multiplex polymerase chain reaction (PCR) testing in patients with suspected meningoencephalitis in high human immunodeficiency virus-prevalence African settings are not known. We describe the clinical and laboratory characteristics of 13 patients with HHV-6 CSF PCR positivity in Botswana.

Effectiveness of mRNA Vaccines Against COVID-19 Hospitalization by Age and Chronic Medical Conditions Burden Among Immunocompetent US Adults, March-August 2021

Vaccine effectiveness (VE) against COVID-19 hospitalization was evaluated among immunocompetent adults (≥18 years) during March-August 2021 using a case-control design. Among 1669 hospitalized COVID-19 cases (11% fully vaccinated) and 1950 RT-PCR-negative controls (54% fully vaccinated), VE was 96% (95% confidence interval [CI], 93%-98%) among patients with no chronic medical conditions and 83% (95% CI, 76%-88%) among patients with ≥ 3 categories of conditions. VE was similar between those aged 18-64 years versus ≥65 years (P > .05). VE against severe COVID-19 was very high among adults without chronic conditions and lessened with increasing comorbidity burden.

Effectiveness of Severe Acute Respiratory Syndrome Coronavirus 2 Messenger RNA Vaccines for Preventing Coronavirus Disease 2019 Hospitalizations in the United States

BACKGROUND

As severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2) vaccination coverage increases in the United States, there is a need to understand the real-world effectiveness against severe coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) and among people at increased risk for poor outcomes.

METHODS

In a multicenter case-control analysis of US adults hospitalized March 11-May 5, 2021, we evaluated vaccine effectiveness to prevent COVID-19 hospitalizations by comparing odds of prior vaccination with a messenger RNA (mRNA) vaccine (Pfizer-BioNTech or Moderna) between cases hospitalized with COVID-19 and hospital-based controls who tested negative for SARS-CoV-2.

RESULTS

Among 1212 participants, including 593 cases and 619 controls, median age was 58 years, 22.8% were Black, 13.9% were Hispanic, and 21.0% had immunosuppression. SARS-CoV-2 lineage B0.1.1.7 (Alpha) was the most common variant (67.9% of viruses with lineage determined). Full vaccination (receipt of 2 vaccine doses ≥14 days before illness onset) had been received by 8.2% of cases and 36.4% of controls. Overall vaccine effectiveness was 87.1% (95% confidence interval [CI], 80.7-91.3). Vaccine effectiveness was similar for Pfizer-BioNTech and Moderna vaccines, and highest in adults aged 18-49 years (97.4%; 95% CI, 79.3-9.7). Among 45 patients with vaccine-breakthrough COVID hospitalizations, 44 (97.8%) were ≥50 years old and 20 (44.4%) had immunosuppression. Vaccine effectiveness was lower among patients with immunosuppression (62.9%; 95% CI,20.8-82.6) than without immunosuppression (91.3%; 95% CI, 85.6-94.8).

CONCLUSION

During March-May 2021, SARS-CoV-2 mRNA vaccines were highly effective for preventing COVID-19 hospitalizations among US adults. SARS-CoV-2 vaccination was beneficial for patients with immunosuppression, but effectiveness was lower in the immunosuppressed population.

Associations between persistent symptoms after mild COVID‐19 and long‐term health status, quality of life, and psychological distress

Background

We sought to assess whether persistent COVID‐19 symptoms beyond 6 months (Long‐COVID) among patients with mild COVID‐19 is associated with poorer health status, quality of life, and psychological distress.

Methods

This was a multicenter prospective cohort study that included adult outpatients with acute COVID‐19 from eight sites during 2‐week sampling periods from April 1 and July 28, 2020. Participants were contacted 6–11 months after their first positive SARS‐CoV‐2 to complete a survey, which collected information on the severity of eight COVID‐19 symptoms using a 4‐point scale ranging from 0 (not present) to 3 (severe) at 1 month before COVID‐19 (pre‐illness) and at follow‐up; the difference for each was calculated as an attributable persistent symptom severity score. A total attributable persistent COVID‐19 symptom burden score was calculated by summing the attributable persistent severity scores for all eight symptoms. Outcomes measured at long‐term follow‐up comprised overall health status (EuroQol visual analogue scale), quality of life (EQ‐5D‐5L), and psychological distress (Patient Health Questionnaire‐4). The association between the total attributable persistent COVID‐19 burden score and each outcome was analyzed using multivariable proportional odds regression.

Results

Of the 2092 outpatients with COVID‐19, 436 (21%) responded to the survey. The median (IQR) attributable persistent COVID‐19 symptom burden score was 2 (0, 4); higher scores were associated with lower overall health status (aOR 0.63; 95% CI: 0.57–0.69), lower quality of life (aOR: 0.65; 95%CI: 0.59–0.72), and higher psychological distress (aOR: 1.40; 95%CI, 1.28–1.54) after adjusting for age, race, ethnicity, education, and income.

Conclusions

In participants with mild acute COVID‐19, the burden of persistent symptoms was significantly associated with poorer long‐term health status, poorer quality of life, and psychological distress.

Clinical severity of, and effectiveness of mRNA vaccines against, covid-19 from omicron, delta, and alpha SARS-CoV-2 variants in the United States: prospective observational study

OBJECTIVES

To characterize the clinical severity of covid-19 associated with the alpha, delta, and omicron SARS-CoV-2 variants among adults admitted to hospital and to compare the effectiveness of mRNA vaccines to prevent hospital admissions related to each variant.

DESIGN

Case-control study.

SETTING

21 hospitals across the United States.

PARTICIPANTS

11 690 adults (≥18 years) admitted to hospital: 5728 with covid-19 (cases) and 5962 without covid-19 (controls). Patients were classified into SARS-CoV-2 variant groups based on viral whole genome sequencing, and, if sequencing did not reveal a lineage, by the predominant circulating variant at the time of hospital admission: alpha (11 March to 3 July 2021), delta (4 July to 25 December 2021), and omicron (26 December 2021 to 14 January 2022).

MAIN OUTCOME MEASURES

Vaccine effectiveness calculated using a test negative design for mRNA vaccines to prevent covid-19 related hospital admissions by each variant (alpha, delta, omicron). Among patients admitted to hospital with covid-19, disease severity on the World Health Organization's clinical progression scale was compared among variants using proportional odds regression.

RESULTS

Effectiveness of the mRNA vaccines to prevent covid-19 associated hospital admissions was 85% (95% confidence interval 82% to 88%) for two vaccine doses against the alpha variant, 85% (83% to 87%) for two doses against the delta variant, 94% (92% to 95%) for three doses against the delta variant, 65% (51% to 75%) for two doses against the omicron variant; and 86% (77% to 91%) for three doses against the omicron variant. In-hospital mortality was 7.6% (81/1060) for alpha, 12.2% (461/3788) for delta, and 7.1% (40/565) for omicron. Among unvaccinated patients with covid-19 admitted to hospital, severity on the WHO clinical progression scale was higher for the delta versus alpha variant (adjusted proportional odds ratio 1.28, 95% confidence interval 1.11 to 1.46), and lower for the omicron versus delta variant (0.61, 0.49 to 0.77). Compared with unvaccinated patients, severity was lower for vaccinated patients for each variant, including alpha (adjusted proportional odds ratio 0.33, 0.23 to 0.49), delta (0.44, 0.37 to 0.51), and omicron (0.61, 0.44 to 0.85).

CONCLUSIONS

mRNA vaccines were found to be highly effective in preventing covid-19 associated hospital admissions related to the alpha, delta, and omicron variants, but three vaccine doses were required to achieve protection against omicron similar to the protection that two doses provided against the delta and alpha variants. Among adults admitted to hospital with covid-19, the omicron variant was associated with less severe disease than the delta variant but still resulted in substantial morbidity and mortality. Vaccinated patients admitted to hospital with covid-19 had significantly lower disease severity than unvaccinated patients for all the variants.

Effectiveness of a Third Dose of Pfizer-BioNTech and Moderna Vaccines in Preventing COVID-19 Hospitalization Among Immunocompetent and Immunocompromised Adults - United States, August-December 2021

COVID-19 mRNA vaccines (BNT162b2 [Pfizer-BioNTech] and mRNA-1273 [Moderna]) provide protection against infection with SARS-CoV-2, the virus that causes COVID-19, and are highly effective against COVID-19-associated hospitalization among eligible persons who receive 2 doses (1,2). However, vaccine effectiveness (VE) among persons with immunocompromising conditions* is lower than that among immunocompetent persons (2), and VE declines after several months among all persons (3). On August 12, 2021, the Food and Drug Administration (FDA) issued an emergency use authorization (EUA) for a third mRNA vaccine dose as part of a primary series ≥28 days after dose 2 for persons aged ≥12 years with immunocompromising conditions, and, on November 19, 2021, as a booster dose for all adults aged ≥18 years at least 6 months after dose 2, changed to ≥5 months after dose 2 on January 3, 2022 (4,5,6). Among 2,952 adults (including 1,385 COVID-19 case-patients and 1,567 COVID-19-negative controls) hospitalized at 21 U.S. hospitals during August 19-December 15, 2021, effectiveness of mRNA vaccines against COVID-19-associated hospitalization was compared between adults eligible for but who had not received a third vaccine dose (1,251) and vaccine-eligible adults who received a third dose ≥7 days before illness onset (312). Among 1,875 adults without immunocompromising conditions (including 1,065 [57%] unvaccinated, 679 [36%] 2-dose recipients, and 131 [7%] 3-dose [booster] recipients), VE against COVID-19 hospitalization was higher among those who received a booster dose (97%; 95% CI = 95%-99%) compared with that among 2-dose recipients (82%; 95% CI = 77%-86%) (p <0.001). Among 1,077 adults with immunocompromising conditions (including 324 [30%] unvaccinated, 572 [53%] 2-dose recipients, and 181 [17%] 3-dose recipients), VE was higher among those who received a third dose to complete a primary series (88%; 95% CI = 81%-93%) compared with 2-dose recipients (69%; 95% CI = 57%-78%) (p <0.001). Administration of a third COVID-19 mRNA vaccine dose as part of a primary series among immunocompromised adults, or as a booster dose among immunocompetent adults, provides improved protection against COVID-19-associated hospitalization.

Serial Thromboelastography and the Development of Venous Thromboembolism in Critically Ill Patients With COVID-19

To test the hypothesis that relatively lower clot strength on thromboelastography maximum amplitude (MA) is associated with development of venous thromboembolism (VTE) in critically ill patients with COVID-19.

DESIGN

Prospective, observational cohort study.

SETTING

Tertiary care, academic medical center in Nashville, TN.

PATIENTS

Patients with acute respiratory failure from COVID-19 pneumonia admitted to the adult medical ICU without known VTE at enrollment.

INTERVENTIONS

None.

MEASUREMENTS AND MAIN RESULTS

Ninety-eight consecutive critically ill adults with laboratory-confirmed COVID-19 were enrolled. Thromboelastography parameters and conventional coagulation parameters were measured on days 0 (within 48 hr of ICU admission), 3, 5, and 7 after enrollment. The primary outcome was diagnosis of VTE with confirmed deep venous thrombosis and/or pulmonary embolism by clinical imaging or autopsy. Twenty-six patients developed a VTE. Multivariable regression controlling for antiplatelet exposure and anticoagulation dose with death as a competing risk found that lower MA was associated with increased risk of VTE. Each 1 mm increase in enrollment and peak MA was associated with an 8% and 14% decrease in the risk of VTE, respectively (enrollment MA: subdistribution hazard ratio [SHR], 0.92; 95% CI, 0.87-0.97; p = 0.003 and peak MA: SHR, 0.86; 95% CI, 0.81-0.91; p < 0.001). Lower enrollment platelet counts and fibrinogen levels were also associated with increased risk of VTE (p = 0.002 and p = 0.01, respectively). Platelet count and fibrinogen level were positively associated with MA (multivariable model: adjusted R 2 = 0.51; p < 0.001).

CONCLUSIONS

When controlling for the competing risk of death, lower enrollment and peak MA were associated with increased risk of VTE. Lower platelet counts and fibrinogen levels at enrollment were associated with increased risk of VTE. The association of diminished MA, platelet counts, and fibrinogen with VTE may suggest a relative consumptive coagulopathy in critically ill patients with COVID-19.

Cost-effectiveness of cryptococcal antigen screening at CD4 counts of 101-200 cells/µL in Botswana

Background: Cryptococcal antigen (CrAg) screening in individuals with advanced HIV reduces cryptococcal meningitis (CM) cases and deaths. The World Health Organization recently recommended increasing screening thresholds from CD4 ≤100 cells/µL to ≤200 cells/µL. CrAg screening at CD4 ≤100 cells/µL is cost-effective; however, the cost-effectiveness of screening patients with CD4 101-200 cells/µL requires evaluation. Methods: Using a decision analytic model with Botswana-specific cost and clinical estimates, we evaluated CrAg screening and treatment among individuals with CD4 counts of 101-200 cells/µL. We estimated the number of CM cases and deaths nationally and treatment costs without screening. For screening we modeled the number of CrAg tests performed, number of CrAg-positive patients identified, proportion started on pre-emptive fluconazole, CM cases and deaths. Screening and treatment costs were estimated and cost per death averted or disability-adjusted life year (DALY) saved compared with no screening. Results: Without screening, we estimated 142 CM cases and 85 deaths annually among individuals with CD4 101-200 cells/µL, with treatment costs of $368,982. With CrAg screening, an estimated 33,036 CrAg tests are performed, and 48 deaths avoided (1,017 DALYs saved).  While CrAg screening costs an additional $155,601, overall treatment costs fall by $39,600 (preemptive and hospital-based CM treatment), yielding a net increase of $116,001. Compared to no screening, high coverage of CrAg screening and pre-emptive treatment for CrAg-positive individuals in this population avoids one death for $2440 and $114 per DALY saved. In sensitivity analyses assuming a higher proportion of antiretroviral therapy (ART)-naïve patients (75% versus 15%), cost per death averted was $1472; $69 per DALY saved. Conclusions: CrAg screening for individuals with CD4 101-200 cells/µL was estimated to have a modest impact, involve additional costs, and be less cost-effective than screening populations with CD4 counts ≤100 cells/µL. Additional CrAg screening costs must be considered against other health system priorities.

Effect of Antigenic Drift on Influenza Vaccine Effectiveness in the United States-2019-2020

BACKGROUND

At the start of the 2019-2020 influenza season, concern arose that circulating B/Victoria viruses of the globally emerging clade V1A.3 were antigenically drifted from the strain included in the vaccine. Intense B/Victoria activity was followed by circulation of genetically diverse A(H1N1)pdm09 viruses that were also antigenically drifted. We measured vaccine effectiveness (VE) in the United States against illness from these emerging viruses.

METHODS

We enrolled outpatients aged ≥6 months with acute respiratory illness at 5 sites. Respiratory specimens were tested for influenza by reverse-transcriptase polymerase chain reaction (RT-PCR). Using the test-negative design, we determined influenza VE by virus subtype/lineage and genetic subclades by comparing odds of vaccination in influenza cases versus test-negative controls.

RESULTS

Among 8845 enrollees, 2722 (31%) tested positive for influenza, including 1209 (44%) for B/Victoria and 1405 (51%) for A(H1N1)pdm09. Effectiveness against any influenza illness was 39% (95% confidence interval [CI]: 32-44), 45% (95% CI: 37-52) against B/Victoria and 30% (95% CI: 21-39) against A(H1N1)pdm09-associated illness. Vaccination offered no protection against A(H1N1)pdm09 viruses with antigenically drifted clade 6B.1A 183P-5A+156K HA genes (VE 7%; 95% CI: -14 to 23%) which predominated after January.

CONCLUSIONS

Vaccination provided protection against influenza illness, mainly due to infections from B/Victoria viruses. Vaccine protection against illness from A(H1N1)pdm09 was lower than historically observed effectiveness of 40%-60%, due to late-season vaccine mismatch following emergence of antigenically drifted viruses. The effect of drift on vaccine protection is not easy to predict and, even in drifted years, significant protection can be observed.

Association Between mRNA Vaccination and COVID-19 Hospitalization and Disease Severity

Importance

A comprehensive understanding of the benefits of COVID-19 vaccination requires consideration of disease attenuation, determined as whether people who develop COVID-19 despite vaccination have lower disease severity than unvaccinated people.

Objective

To evaluate the association between vaccination with mRNA COVID-19 vaccines-mRNA-1273 (Moderna) and BNT162b2 (Pfizer-BioNTech)-and COVID-19 hospitalization, and, among patients hospitalized with COVID-19, the association with progression to critical disease.

Design, Setting, and Participants

A US 21-site case-control analysis of 4513 adults hospitalized between March 11 and August 15, 2021, with 28-day outcome data on death and mechanical ventilation available for patients enrolled through July 14, 2021. Date of final follow-up was August 8, 2021.

Exposures

COVID-19 vaccination.

Main Outcomes and Measures

Associations were evaluated between prior vaccination and (1) hospitalization for COVID-19, in which case patients were those hospitalized for COVID-19 and control patients were those hospitalized for an alternative diagnosis; and (2) disease progression among patients hospitalized for COVID-19, in which cases and controls were COVID-19 patients with and without progression to death or mechanical ventilation, respectively. Associations were measured with multivariable logistic regression.

Results

Among 4513 patients (median age, 59 years [IQR, 45-69]; 2202 [48.8%] women; 23.0% non-Hispanic Black individuals, 15.9% Hispanic individuals, and 20.1% with an immunocompromising condition), 1983 were case patients with COVID-19 and 2530 were controls without COVID-19. Unvaccinated patients accounted for 84.2% (1669/1983) of COVID-19 hospitalizations. Hospitalization for COVID-19 was significantly associated with decreased likelihood of vaccination (cases, 15.8%; controls, 54.8%; adjusted OR, 0.15; 95% CI, 0.13-0.18), including for sequenced SARS-CoV-2 Alpha (8.7% vs 51.7%; aOR, 0.10; 95% CI, 0.06-0.16) and Delta variants (21.9% vs 61.8%; aOR, 0.14; 95% CI, 0.10-0.21). This association was stronger for immunocompetent patients (11.2% vs 53.5%; aOR, 0.10; 95% CI, 0.09-0.13) than immunocompromised patients (40.1% vs 58.8%; aOR, 0.49; 95% CI, 0.35-0.69) (P < .001) and weaker at more than 120 days since vaccination with BNT162b2 (5.8% vs 11.5%; aOR, 0.36; 95% CI, 0.27-0.49) than with mRNA-1273 (1.9% vs 8.3%; aOR, 0.15; 95% CI, 0.09-0.23) (P < .001). Among 1197 patients hospitalized with COVID-19, death or invasive mechanical ventilation by day 28 was associated with decreased likelihood of vaccination (12.0% vs 24.7%; aOR, 0.33; 95% CI, 0.19-0.58).

Conclusions and Relevance

Vaccination with an mRNA COVID-19 vaccine was significantly less likely among patients with COVID-19 hospitalization and disease progression to death or mechanical ventilation. These findings are consistent with risk reduction among vaccine breakthrough infections compared with absence of vaccination.

Messenger RNA Vaccine Effectiveness Against Coronavirus Disease 2019 Among Symptomatic Outpatients Aged ≥16 Years in the United States, February-May 2021

Evaluations of vaccine effectiveness (VE) are important to monitor as coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) vaccines are introduced in the general population. Research staff enrolled symptomatic participants seeking outpatient medical care for COVID-19-like illness or severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2) testing from a multisite network. VE was evaluated using the test-negative design. Among 236 SARS-CoV-2 nucleic acid amplification test-positive and 576 test-negative participants aged ≥16 years, the VE of messenger RNA vaccines against COVID-19 was 91% (95% confidence interval, 83%-95%) for full vaccination and 75% (55%-87%) for partial vaccination. Vaccination was associated with prevention of most COVID-19 cases among people seeking outpatient medical care.

A literature review of severity scores for adults with influenza or community-acquired pneumonia - implications for influenza vaccines and therapeutics

Influenza vaccination and antiviral therapeutics may attenuate disease, decreasing severity of illness in vaccinated and treated persons. Standardized assessment tools, definitions of disease severity, and clinical endpoints would support characterizing the attenuating effects of influenza vaccines and antivirals. We review potential clinical parameters and endpoints that may be useful for ordinal scales evaluating attenuating effects of influenza vaccines and antivirals in hospital-based studies. In studies of influenza and community-acquired pneumonia, common physiologic parameters that predicted outcomes such as mortality, ICU admission, complications, and duration of stay included vital signs (hypotension, tachypnea, fever, hypoxia), laboratory results (blood urea nitrogen, platelets, serum sodium), and radiographic findings of infiltrates or effusions. Ordinal scales based on these parameters may be useful endpoints for evaluating attenuating effects of influenza vaccines and therapeutics. Factors such as clinical and policy relevance, reproducibility, and specificity of measurements should be considered when creating a standardized ordinal scale for assessment.

Differentiating severe and non-severe lower respiratory tract illness in patients hospitalized with influenza: Development of the Influenza Disease Evaluation and Assessment of Severity (IDEAS) scale

BACKGROUND

Experimental studies have shown that vaccination can reduce viral replication to attenuate progression of influenza-associated lower respiratory tract illness (LRTI). However, clinical studies are conflicting, possibly due to use of non-specific outcomes reflecting a mix of large and small airway LRTI lacking specificity for acute lung or organ injury.

METHODS

We developed a global ordinal scale to differentiate large and small airway LRTI in hospitalized adults with influenza using physiologic features and interventions (PFIs): vital signs, laboratory and radiographic findings, and clinical interventions. We reviewed the literature to identify common PFIs across 9 existing scales of pneumonia and sepsis severity. To characterize patients using this scale, we applied the scale to an antiviral clinical trial dataset where these PFIs were measured through routine clinical care in adults hospitalized with influenza-associated LRTI during the 2010-2013 seasons.

RESULTS

We evaluated 12 clinical parameters among 1020 adults; 210 (21%) had laboratory-confirmed influenza, with a median severity score of 4.5 (interquartile range, 2-8). Among influenza cases, median age was 63 years, 20% were hospitalized in the prior 90 days, 50% had chronic obstructive pulmonary disease, and 22% had congestive heart failure. Primary influencers of higher score included pulmonary infiltrates on imaging (48.1%), heart rate ≥110 beats/minute (41.4%), oxygen saturation <93% (47.6%) and respiratory rate >24 breaths/minute (21.0%). Key PFIs distinguishing patients with severity < or ≥8 (upper quartile) included infiltrates (27.1% vs 90.0%), temperature ≥ 39.1°C or <36.0°C (7.1% vs 27.1%), respiratory rate >24 breaths/minute (7.9% vs 47.1%), heart rate ≥110 beats/minute (29.3% vs 65.7%), oxygen saturation <90% (14.3% vs 31.4%), white blood cell count >15,000 (5.0% vs 27.2%), and need for invasive or non-invasive mechanical ventilation (2.1% vs 15.7%).

CONCLUSION

We developed a scale in adults hospitalized with influenza-associated LRTI demonstrating a broad distribution of physiologic severity which may be useful for future studies evaluating the disease attenuating effects of influenza vaccination or other therapeutics.

Clinical Influenza Testing Practices in Hospitalized Children at United States Medical Centers, 2015-2018

At nine US hospitals that enrolled children hospitalized with acute respiratory illness (ARI) during 2015-2016 through 2017-2018 influenza seasons, 50% of children with ARI received clinician-initiated testing for influenza and 35% of cases went undiagnosed due to lack of clinician-initiated testing. Marked heterogeneity in testing practice was observed across sites.

Data-driven clustering identifies features distinguishing multisystem inflammatory syndrome from acute COVID-19 in children and adolescents

BACKGROUND

Multisystem inflammatory syndrome in children (MIS-C) consensus criteria were designed for maximal sensitivity and therefore capture patients with acute COVID-19 pneumonia.

METHODS

We performed unsupervised clustering on data from 1,526 patients (684 labeled MIS-C by clinicians) <21 years old hospitalized with COVID-19-related illness admitted between 15 March 2020 and 31 December 2020. We compared prevalence of assigned MIS-C labels and clinical features among clusters, followed by recursive feature elimination to identify characteristics of potentially misclassified MIS-C-labeled patients.

FINDINGS

Of 94 clinical features tested, 46 were retained for clustering. Cluster 1 patients (N = 498; 92% labeled MIS-C) were mostly previously healthy (71%), with mean age 7·2 ± 0·4 years, predominant cardiovascular (77%) and/or mucocutaneous (82%) involvement, high inflammatory biomarkers, and mostly SARS-CoV-2 PCR negative (60%). Cluster 2 patients (N = 445; 27% labeled MIS-C) frequently had pre-existing conditions (79%, with 39% respiratory), were similarly 7·4 ± 2·1 years old, and commonly had chest radiograph infiltrates (79%) and positive PCR testing (90%). Cluster 3 patients (N = 583; 19% labeled MIS-C) were younger (2·8 ± 2·0 y), PCR positive (86%), with less inflammation. Radiographic findings of pulmonary infiltrates and positive SARS-CoV-2 PCR accurately distinguished cluster 2 MIS-C labeled patients from cluster 1 patients.

INTERPRETATION

Using a data driven, unsupervised approach, we identified features that cluster patients into a group with high likelihood of having MIS-C. Other features identified a cluster of patients more likely to have acute severe COVID-19 pulmonary disease, and patients in this cluster labeled by clinicians as MIS-C may be misclassified. These data driven phenotypes may help refine the diagnosis of MIS-C.

Comparative Effectiveness of Moderna, Pfizer-BioNTech, and Janssen (Johnson & Johnson) Vaccines in Preventing COVID-19 Hospitalizations Among Adults Without Immunocompromising Conditions - United States, March-August 2021

Three COVID-19 vaccines are authorized or approved for use among adults in the United States (1,2). Two 2-dose mRNA vaccines, mRNA-1273 from Moderna and BNT162b2 from Pfizer-BioNTech, received Emergency Use Authorization (EUA) by the Food and Drug Administration (FDA) in December 2020 for persons aged ≥18 years and aged ≥16 years, respectively. A 1-dose viral vector vaccine (Ad26.COV2 from Janssen [Johnson & Johnson]) received EUA in February 2021 for persons aged ≥18 years (3). The Pfizer-BioNTech vaccine received FDA approval for persons aged ≥16 years on August 23, 2021 (4). Current guidelines from FDA and CDC recommend vaccination of eligible persons with one of these three products, without preference for any specific vaccine (4,5). To assess vaccine effectiveness (VE) of these three products in preventing COVID-19 hospitalization, CDC and collaborators conducted a case-control analysis among 3,689 adults aged ≥18 years who were hospitalized at 21 U.S. hospitals across 18 states during March 11-August 15, 2021. An additional analysis compared serum antibody levels (anti-spike immunoglobulin G [IgG] and anti-receptor binding domain [RBD] IgG) to SARS-CoV-2, the virus that causes COVID-19, among 100 healthy volunteers enrolled at three hospitals 2-6 weeks after full vaccination with the Moderna, Pfizer-BioNTech, or Janssen COVID-19 vaccine. Patients with immunocompromising conditions were excluded. VE against COVID-19 hospitalizations was higher for the Moderna vaccine (93%; 95% confidence interval [CI] = 91%-95%) than for the Pfizer-BioNTech vaccine (88%; 95% CI = 85%-91%) (p = 0.011); VE for both mRNA vaccines was higher than that for the Janssen vaccine (71%; 95% CI = 56%-81%) (all p<0.001). Protection for the Pfizer-BioNTech vaccine declined 4 months after vaccination. Postvaccination anti-spike IgG and anti-RBD IgG levels were significantly lower in persons vaccinated with the Janssen vaccine than the Moderna or Pfizer-BioNTech vaccines. Although these real-world data suggest some variation in levels of protection by vaccine, all FDA-approved or authorized COVID-19 vaccines provide substantial protection against COVID-19 hospitalization.

Influenza Vaccine Effectiveness Against Hospitalization in the United States, 2019-2020

BACKGROUND

Influenza causes significant morbidity and mortality and stresses hospital resources during periods of increased circulation. We evaluated the effectiveness of the 2019-2020 influenza vaccine against influenza-associated hospitalization in the United States.

METHODS

We included adults hospitalized with acute respiratory illness at 14 hospitals and tested for influenza viruses by reserve-transcription polymerase chain reaction. Vaccine effectiveness (VE) was estimated by comparing the odds of current-season influenza vaccination in test-positive influenza cases vs test-negative controls, adjusting for confounders. VE was stratified by age and major circulating influenza types along with A(H1N1)pdm09 genetic subgroups.

RESULTS

A total of 3116 participants were included, including 18% (n = 553) influenza-positive cases. Median age was 63 years. Sixty-seven percent (n = 2079) received vaccination. Overall adjusted VE against influenza viruses was 41% (95% confidence interval [CI], 27%-52%). VE against A(H1N1)pdm09 viruses was 40% (95% CI, 24%-53%) and 33% against B viruses (95% CI, 0-56%). Of the 2 major A(H1N1)pdm09 subgroups (representing 90% of sequenced H1N1 viruses), VE against one group (5A + 187A,189E) was 59% (95% CI, 34%-75%) whereas no VE was observed against the other group (5A + 156K) (-1% [95% CI, -61% to 37%]).

CONCLUSIONS

In a primarily older population, influenza vaccination was associated with a 41% reduction in risk of hospitalized influenza illness.

Sustained Effectiveness of Pfizer-BioNTech and Moderna Vaccines Against COVID-19 Associated Hospitalizations Among Adults - United States, March-July 2021

Real-world evaluations have demonstrated high effectiveness of vaccines against COVID-19-associated hospitalizations (1-4) measured shortly after vaccination; longer follow-up is needed to assess durability of protection. In an evaluation at 21 hospitals in 18 states, the duration of mRNA vaccine (Pfizer-BioNTech or Moderna) effectiveness (VE) against COVID-19-associated hospitalizations was assessed among adults aged ≥18 years. Among 3,089 hospitalized adults (including 1,194 COVID-19 case-patients and 1,895 non-COVID-19 control-patients), the median age was 59 years, 48.7% were female, and 21.1% had an immunocompromising condition. Overall, 141 (11.8%) case-patients and 988 (52.1%) controls were fully vaccinated (defined as receipt of the second dose of Pfizer-BioNTech or Moderna mRNA COVID-19 vaccines ≥14 days before illness onset), with a median interval of 65 days (range = 14-166 days) after receipt of second dose. VE against COVID-19-associated hospitalization during the full surveillance period was 86% (95% confidence interval [CI] = 82%-88%) overall and 90% (95% CI = 87%-92%) among adults without immunocompromising conditions. VE against COVID-19- associated hospitalization was 86% (95% CI = 82%-90%) 2-12 weeks and 84% (95% CI = 77%-90%) 13-24 weeks from receipt of the second vaccine dose, with no significant change between these periods (p = 0.854). Whole genome sequencing of 454 case-patient specimens found that 242 (53.3%) belonged to the B.1.1.7 (Alpha) lineage and 74 (16.3%) to the B.1.617.2 (Delta) lineage. Effectiveness of mRNA vaccines against COVID-19-associated hospitalization was sustained over a 24-week period, including among groups at higher risk for severe COVID-19; ongoing monitoring is needed as new SARS-CoV-2 variants emerge. To reduce their risk for hospitalization, all eligible persons should be offered COVID-19 vaccination.

Influenza vaccine acceptance and hesitancy among adults hospitalized with severe acute respiratory illnesses, United States 2019-2020

INTRODUCTION

Understanding patient factors associated with not being vaccinated is essential for successful implementation of influenza vaccination programs.

METHODS

We enrolled adults hospitalized with severe acute respiratory illness at 10 United States (US) hospitals during the 2019-2020 influenza season. We interviewed patients to collect data about influenza vaccination, sociodemographic characteristics, and vaccine perceptions.

RESULTS

Among 679 participants, 264 (38.9%) reported not receiving influenza vaccination. Among those not vaccinated, 135 (51.1%) reported choosing not to receive a vaccine because of perceived ineffectiveness (36.7%) or risk (14.4%) of influenza vaccination. Sociodemographic factors associated with not being vaccinated included no medical insurance (aOR = 6.42; 95% CI: 2.52-16.38) and being non-White or Hispanic (aOR = 1.54, 95% CI: 1.02-2.32).

CONCLUSIONS

Optimizing uptake of influenza vaccination in the US may be improved by educational programs regarding vaccine safety and effectiveness and enhancing vaccine access, particularly among non-White and Hispanic Americans and those without medical insurance.

Influenza Vaccine Effectiveness in Inpatient and Outpatient Settings in the United States, 2015-2018

BACKGROUND

Demonstration of influenza vaccine effectiveness (VE) against hospitalized illness in addition to milder outpatient illness may strengthen vaccination messaging. Our objective was to compare patient characteristics and VE between United States (US) inpatient and outpatient VE networks.

METHODS

We tested adults with acute respiratory illness (ARI) for influenza within 1 outpatient-based and 1 hospital-based VE network from 2015 through 2018. We compared age, sex, and high-risk conditions. The test-negative design was used to compare vaccination odds in influenza-positive cases vs influenza-negative controls. We estimated VE using logistic regression adjusting for site, age, sex, race/ethnicity, peak influenza activity, time to testing from, season (overall VE), and underlying conditions. VE differences (ΔVE) were assessed with 95% confidence intervals (CIs) determined through bootstrapping with significance defined as excluding the null.

RESULTS

The networks enrolled 14 573 (4144 influenza-positive) outpatients and 6769 (1452 influenza-positive) inpatients. Inpatients were older (median, 62 years vs 49 years) and had more high-risk conditions (median, 4 vs 1). Overall VE across seasons was 31% (95% CI, 26%-37%) among outpatients and 36% (95% CI, 27%-44%) among inpatients. Strain-specific VE (95% CI) among outpatients vs inpatients was 37% (25%-47%) vs 53% (37%-64%) against H1N1pdm09; 19% (9%-27%) vs 23% (8%-35%) against H3N2; and 46% (38%-53%) vs 46% (31%-58%) against B viruses. ΔVE was not significant for any comparison across all sites.

CONCLUSIONS

Inpatients and outpatients with ARI represent distinct populations. Despite comparatively poor health among inpatients, influenza vaccination was effective in preventing influenza-associated hospitalizations.

Adults Hospitalized With Coronavirus Disease 2019 (COVID-19)-United States, March-June and October-December 2020: Implications for the Potential Effects of COVID-19 Tier-1 Vaccination on Future Hospitalizations and Outcomes

BACKGROUND

Because of the increased risk for severe coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19), the Advisory Committee on Immunization Practices (ACIP) initially prioritized COVID-19 vaccination for persons in long-term care facilities (LTCF), persons aged ≥65 years, and persons aged 16-64 years with high-risk medical conditions when there is limited vaccine supply. We compared characteristics and severe outcomes of hospitalized patients with COVID-19 in the United States between early and later in the pandemic categorized by groups at higher risk of severe COVID-19.

METHODS

Observational study of sampled patients aged ≥18 years who tested positive for severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2) and admitted to one of 14 academic hospitals in the United States during March-June and October-December 2020. Demographic and clinical information were gathered from electronic health record data.

RESULTS

Among 647 patients, 91% met ≥1 of the following risk factors for severe COVID-19 [91% March-June (n = 434); 90% October-December (n = 213)]; 19% were LTCF residents, 45% were aged ≥65-years, and 84% had ≥1 high-risk condition. The proportion of patients who resided in a LTCF declined significantly (25% vs 6%) from early to later pandemic periods. Compared with patients at lower risk for severe COVID-19, in-hospital mortality was higher among patients at high risk for severe COVID-19 (20% vs 7%); these differences were consistently observed between March-June and October-December.

CONCLUSIONS

Most adults hospitalized with COVID-19 were those recommended to be prioritized for vaccination based on risk for developing severe COVID-19. These findings highlight the continued urgency to vaccinate patients at high risk for severe COVID-19 and monitor vaccination impact on hospitalizations and outcomes.

Effectiveness of SARS-CoV-2 mRNA Vaccines for Preventing Covid-19 Hospitalizations in the United States

Background

As SARS-CoV-2 vaccination coverage increases in the United States (US), there is a need to understand the real-world effectiveness against severe Covid-19 and among people at increased risk for poor outcomes.

Methods

In a multicenter case-control analysis of US adults hospitalized March 11 - May 5, 2021, we evaluated vaccine effectiveness to prevent Covid-19 hospitalizations by comparing odds of prior vaccination with an mRNA vaccine (Pfizer-BioNTech or Moderna) between cases hospitalized with Covid-19 and hospital-based controls who tested negative for SARS-CoV-2.

Results

Among 1210 participants, median age was 58 years, 22.8% were Black, 13.8% were Hispanic, and 20.6% had immunosuppression. SARS-CoV-2 lineage B.1.1.7 was most common variant (59.7% of sequenced viruses). Full vaccination (receipt of two vaccine doses ≥14 days before illness onset) had been received by 45/590 (7.6%) cases and 215/620 (34.7%) controls. Overall vaccine effectiveness was 86.9% (95% CI: 80.4 to 91.2%). Vaccine effectiveness was similar for Pfizer-BioNTech and Moderna vaccines, and highest in adults aged 18-49 years (97.3%; 95% CI: 78.9 to 99.7%). Among 45 patients with vaccine-breakthrough Covid hospitalizations, 44 (97.8%) were ≥50 years old and 20 (44.4%) had immunosuppression. Vaccine effectiveness was lower among patients with immunosuppression (59.2%; 95% CI: 11.9 to 81.1%) than without immunosuppression (91.3%; 95% CI: 85.5 to 94.7%).

Conclusion

During March-May 2021, SARS-CoV-2 mRNA vaccines were highly effective for preventing Covid-19 hospitalizations among US adults. SARS-CoV-2 vaccination was beneficial for patients with immunosuppression, but effectiveness was lower in the immunosuppressed population.

Prevalence and Sequelae of Cryptococcal Antigenemia in Antiretroviral Therapy-Experienced Populations: An Evaluation of Reflex Cryptococcal Antigen Screening in Botswana

BACKGROUND

Evidence to inform cryptococcal antigen (CrAg)-screening guidelines among ART-experienced populations is lacking. We performed a study evaluating the utility of reflex CrAg screening in Gaborone, Botswana.

METHODS

CD4 count data were collected from the HIV reference laboratory from 2014-2016. CrAg screening was performed on samples with CD4 ≤100 cells/µL beginning January 2015. The proportion of CD4 counts ≤100 cells/µL was determined and the frequency of repeat CrAg testing described. Analyses ascertained the impact of ART status on CrAg prevalence and outcomes, and whether CrAg titers could be used for risk stratification.

RESULTS

Overall, 5.6% (3335/59 300) of individuals tested had CD4 ≤100 cells/μL; 2108 samples with CD4 ≤100 cells/μL from 1645 unique patients were CrAg tested. Over half of samples were from ART-experienced individuals: 40.9% (863) on ART and 12.1% (255) defaulters; 22% (463) of CrAg tests were on repeat samples. CrAg prevalence was 4.8% (72/1494; 95% CI, 3.8-6.0%) among outpatients and 21.9% (32/151; 95% CI, 15.3-28.5%) among inpatients. CrAg prevalence rates did not differ by ART status, but 6-month mortality was significantly lower in CrAg-positive individuals on ART at screening. Ten CrAg positives were identified through repeat testing. A CrAg titer cutoff ≥1:80 provided the best discrimination for 6-month survival.

CONCLUSIONS

CrAg-positivity rates in an ART-experienced population were comparable to those seen in ART-naive populations. Repeat screening identified individuals who seroconverted to CrAg positivity and were at risk of cryptococcal disease. CrAg titers ≥1:80 can help identify the individuals at highest risk of death for more intensive management.

Theoretical Framework for Retrospective Studies of the Effectiveness of SARS-CoV-2 Vaccines

Observational studies of the effectiveness of vaccines to prevent COVID-19 are needed to inform real-world use. Such studies are now underway amid the ongoing rollout of SARS-CoV-2 vaccines globally. Although traditional case-control and test-negative design studies feature prominently among strategies used to assess vaccine effectiveness, such studies may encounter important threats to validity. Here, we review the theoretical basis for estimation of vaccine direct effects under traditional case-control and test-negative design frameworks, addressing specific natural history parameters of SARS-CoV-2 infection and COVID-19 relevant to these designs. Bias may be introduced by misclassification of cases and controls, particularly when clinical case criteria include common, nonspecific indicators of COVID-19. When using diagnostic assays with high analytical sensitivity for SARS-CoV-2 detection, individuals testing positive may be counted as cases even if their symptoms are due to other causes. The traditional case-control design may be particularly prone to confounding due to associations of vaccination with healthcare-seeking behavior or risk of infection. The test-negative design reduces but may not eliminate this confounding, for instance, if individuals who receive vaccination seek care or testing for less-severe illness. These circumstances indicate the two study designs cannot be applied naively to datasets gathered through public health surveillance or administrative sources. We suggest practical strategies to reduce bias in vaccine effectiveness estimates at the study design and analysis stages.